5 ms·
That leaves 4/5th of NYC still vulnerable. That's a lot of potential hospitalizations and potential deaths. To reach herd immunity you need at least something l
by rndgermandude 7y ago
That leaves 4/5th of NYC still vulnerable. That's a lot of potential hospitalizations and potential deaths. To reach herd immunity you need at least something like 2/3rds of people immune to the virus. Now imagine another 2/5ths of NYC's population becomes infected in a short period of time and what this would mean for the health care system. It more or less was on the brink of collapsing (some would say actually did collapse for some time) with only 1/5ths.
So thinking the worst is over for sure is wishful thinking; and to just resign to "out of the bag" isn't an option either; the worst is only over if we keep at flattening the curve enough to not collapse the system. There are many different parts to it, and one such part might be contact tracking/tracing with an app.
Also, all the talk about herd immunity etc is based on the premise that you actually get a lasting immunity after you had the virus. While it thankfully looks like this may be the case (exceptions like immunocompromised people, apply) - with e.g. blood plasma from cured patients showing good results when given to still severe cases - it isn't certain yet. It could mutate enough (like the flu) and reinfect, or it could "hide" like herpes and hit you full blown when your immune system isn't operating at full capacity. Let's hope not, but let's act at least with that in mind. Contact tracing technology we develop and roll out now may help should there be a second wave.
And yet another also: there have been reports that even after mild progressions some patients end up with damaged lungs, damage that is most likely be permanent. So while these reports haven't yet been verified or refuted, I am not a big fan of "just get it and get it over with, if you're young and low risk".
- unnouinceput 7y agoIf covid will mutate like flu, every year, this will be the end of human race in maximum half a century - given if the symptoms/damage to our body stays the same regardless of mutations. My take is that our immune system will actually "mutate" as well so we might be, in couple of centuries, in same position as we are now vs. flu (the mortality rate will be insignificant).
- samatman 7y agoApologies for my directness, but no way around it: this is completely unhinged. Humanity has dealt with double-digit-fatal diseases, several of them, for centuries. SARS2 is an ugly bug, but hardly an existential threat to the species.
- unnouinceput 7y agoI said "if", didn't I? Also my prediction is the same as what you said, but in different words.
- lbeltrame 7y ago> It could mutate enough (like the flu) and reinfect, or it could "hide" like herpes and hit you full blown when your immune system isn't operating at full capacity. While not criticizing you directly, I cringe every time I see this reported in the media, and even some TV scientists are not immune from these statements. It is a novel virus, all right. We know almost nothing about it, all right. But it's not a magical Star Trek-like being which does not fit any biological hypothesis. Other members of the coronavirus family do not exhibit these properties (hiding like the herpes virus that is), so it is at least unlikely that this will happen. And while it can mutate, it will do so at a much lower rate than influenza, which, due to the structure of its RNA, can have plenty of recombination events which cause far more variation. A nice non technical explanation: https://www.city-journal.org/coronavirus-vaccine https://www.city-journal.org/coronavirus-vaccine